Dr. Val: So let me get this straight, you’d like me to ask my bloggers to embed links to product sites without directly disclosing that they’re paid to do that, leverage their trust and credibility to get people to click on the links – and once they get to the product site you’ll be collecting personal information about them so you can target them more effectively with offers for drugs and other products? …And how much would you pay the blogger?
SalesGuy: About $7 per completed survey.
Dr. Val: So that’s how much it costs to sell a soul these days? We’re not interested. [Click]
I had my own little email solicitation last week, asking me if I would be interested in being paid to review products on my blog. I headed to the website (Seoblogreviews.com), where I was informed that I would be paid per review, with this little hint –
Are you willing NOT TO MENTION the fact that those reviews are Paid/Sponsored Reviews? (You’ll receive MUCH MORE Paid Reviews Offers if you choose YES).
So basically, advertisers are looking for bloggers to write favorable reviews without revealing that these are ads. If you’re honest, forget about making money. You’ll be outbid by those willing to hide their conflicts of interest.
The FTC is not a day late in their proposed ruling that requires bloggers to reveal income related to their postings.
Let me ask you something, if the surveys that the people took happened to not related to their health, but maybe their lifestyle (how many cars do you have, what kinds of electronics do you plan on buying, etc.) would it be different for you?
I can appreciate the perspective that you don't want to just give the company the "support" stamp, however.
I am not sure that there isn't a good side to the gray area here. I like that the FTC requires the submission of the revenue from the blog advertising, but if you can earn some cash without selling out your followers' health, are you in?
Schruggling-
C'mon. You know the answer to your question. I am a physician blogging about health matters. Why on earth would I risk my credibility by sending folks to links that they think is further content then pulling a fast one and making it an ad or a survey? Do you really think that would be in my best interest in the long term?
I believe we bloggers should be held to the same standards that good newspapers use to advertise. That means if content is an advertisement, the word "Advertisement" appears. If I'm selling ads, they are clearly visible as ads.
I have nothing against advertising. It's how media is supported. But the NTC is right that ads need to be clearly identified. Do you really mean to disagree with that?
No, I don't disagree with your perspective if you are selling healthcare. But if you are just blogging healtcare and selling other stuff, where's the harm? I wanted to see where your line in the sand is. I think your gray/ambiguous area is far narrower than most would be.
Internet ads are contovertial too. It's not like print – with print it is truly anonymous. As soon as you click on a web ad, they can track who you are. Ads are not a whole lot different then what you describe in the post. For me, it would then come down to what ads are you willing to allow – even as designated ads there should be some scrutiny, but to what extent?
You have to have a little bit of a "Caveat Emptor" perspective, too, don't you think?
I think it's ironic that the Internet is said to improve transparency – I think it makes things far more opaque. You can't tell who's selling what anymore – and it's becoming harder to discern COI.
I wouldn't differentiate between types of content (healthcare or toaster oven purchases) – deception is always wrong, and not disclosing advertising is a bad thing. The fact that this may not be obvious to people is scary.
I've heard some horror stories about certain mommy bloggers extorting large gifts from product manufacturers by threatening to write a bad review. The companies can't "out" them because it would probably only harm their brand – "mommy blogger victim of corporate greed."
This is the digital wild west. I look forward to the FTC bringing some standards to the chaos.
Dr. Val makes a really interesting point about transparency and the lack of it in much web advertising.
I like the ethic or labeling advertising as such; I also think it's very worthwhile for folks with a web presence (bloggers, for example) to think about what's being advertised on their site and to make sure it's something that doesn't contradict their ethics or professional stance. (I've had only a few offers of advertising, and they've been for makeup and such. Seriously, me advertising makeup? Not a chance. If Oxford World Classics wanted to pay me to put an ad up, though, I'd consider it seriously.)